Every day, people ask me what it is like to cover the Boston Marathon bombing trial for the media. What does it feel like to be in the courtroom? Have I seen Dzhokhar "Jahar" Tsarnaev? What is he like? Are the victims there? Do I think the jury will "let him off?"

In all honesty, covering Jahar's trial has been surreal in many ways. The courtroom only seats approximately 60 people. Since most courtroom seats are reserved for victims and their families, only a small handful of media outlets were granted passes to sit in the actual courtroom. The remainder of the press and the public sits in courtroom overflow rooms and watches the proceedings on a live video feed controlled by the judge. Recording, taking pictures, and broadcasting is not allowed inside the courthouse. Most reporters have taken to providing live updates of the proceedings via Twitter, and the only thing better than actual pictures are the friendly sketch artists who dot the front rows of the proceedings.

Side bar. They actually play jazz in court during sidebar. It&#39;s not an urban legend. #tsarnaev

Tuesday was the first day where I sat in the same courtroom where Jahar's trial was taking place. I was immediately taken aback by the heaviness inside the courtroom; it drove home the gravity and seriousness of the situation. There was a palpable sadness and fear in the air, mixed with the detached administrative dissonance of law enforcement. These were all sensations I could not sense from the detached comfort of the overflow room.

In the front row behind the Prosecution are the government's reserved seats, and in them sat men in suits. At one point, US Marshals asked the suits to reduce the volume of their laughter and banter during the proceedings.

Marshals ask suits sitting in govt section to keep it down. No idea what they are laughing at.Victim families sitting behind them. #tsarnaev

On the right side there are also several rows of victims and their families who are perhaps there seeking answers, closure, and to see things through. They are quite and never take their eyes off the front of the room. Some have visible disabilities from the bombings, missing limbs, scars.

In the middle of ballistics testimony, a French reporter was escorted out of court by marshals after her laptop began playing audio of a trial news clip. The reporters sit in the middle in cliques. Sometimes it feels like you are in a Roman Colliseum, a gladiator-like atmosphere where everyone wants to drum up the juiciest tidbits off the back of this morbid spectacle. It made me feel guilty for being part of it.

To the left are the seats reserved for the Defense, but most of those seats are empty.

Getting a look at Jahar's face is not easy because he is seated facing the judge, away from courtroom spectators, and he does not glance up at the people behind him. He often slouches down in his seat, fidgeting, maybe out of a mixture of physical discomfort, guilt, embarrassment, and the gravity of knowing just how obviously inexcusable what he has done is to those listening.

Jahar is no longer the bright-eyed kid from the cover of Rolling Stone magazine. Jahar's face is somewhat contorted, one of his eyebrows is caught in an overly arched position, he walks with a limp over a long stride, his left hand is affixed and curled unnaturally towards the ground, while his forearm faces upward. These physical deformities may be a result of some kind of traumatic brain injury Jahar sustained on April 19, 2013 when police dropped flash bang grenades on him and shot him in the head and body several times as he hid [unarmed] in a boat on Franklin Street in Watertown.

Yesterday, law enforcement testified about ballistics and evidence found at the crime scene. They are serious, confident, and they come and go in swarms to support each other. The prosecution's witnesses are a morbid parade who show us pictures of Jahar's bad grades, his messy bedrooms, his phone records, his internet use history, his iPods, and we look at the horrific aftermath of the crime scenes he has admitted to causing.

Even after Ferguson and the Whitey Bulger FBI corruption scandal, there is often a curious lack of curiosity in the courtroom, even from the media, when it comes to questioning statements that law enforcement has made. Truthfully, I don't understand this because the entire trial is about multiple breaches in national security. Some of the nation's best and brightest law enforcement experts have flown in from all around the country to testify at this trial to the fact that [despite warnings from the Russians, the millions of tax dollars spent on law enforcement training and perhaps millenniums of professional experience held between them,] they were out foxed and outsmarted by a 19-year-old stoner and his mentally ill older brother. That "self deployed" officers were injured by friendly fire while Jahar himself eluded the officer's physical clutches for another 19 hours [while surrounding cities "sheltered in place.']

After listening to all the police testimony, I still don't understand how this could have happened or how they all still got to keep their jobs.

In looking around the courtroom today, it struck me that the jazz music we hear during side bar sessions might be the last music Jahar ever hears. Jahar has already admitted responsibility for three murders, he will never taste freedom again. We are only in that courtroom for the jury to debate the merits of whether or not Jahar deserves to "live" behind bars the rest of his life, or alternatively, be put to death by lethal injection.

Truthfully, my sympathies are reserved for the victims of the April 2013 tragedies. Not a day goes by when I am not overcome by the stories the victims bravely told during the first week of trial. 8-year-old Martin Richard won't be starting little league with his friends this month. The pictures of the pools of blood in Officer Sean Collier's cruiser, his autopsy photos, how his life was cut short makes me tear up. Maybe Sean never understood how many people loved him, and his loved ones never had the chance to say goodbye.

In the mean time, the "old Jahar" is gone. Law enforcement put several bullets in him two years ago, and he's never coming back. The "new" Jahar spends his days in solitary confinement at a Federal penitentiary or in court watching experts recount his own horrific mistakes and the worst days of his life. Most of his close friends and family are either overseas, in the clutches of law enforcement, jailed, or have been deported.

As journalists, we are supposed to be objective and detached, but we should never become shamefully mechanical in our approach to such horrific events. As a mother, I'm constantly reminding myself that everyone in the courtroom is someone's son or daughter, that all babies are born perfect. Everyone, including probably Jahar, is struggling to understand why the Tsarnaev brothers allegedly committed such horrible crimes against humanity, but it's unlikely that we will ever get those answers.

Perhaps if Jahar did look back at us once in a while, the humanity left in his eyes would make us question our own hardened convictions about the value of his life (which we debate all day as if he can't hear us.)

This whole spectacle is not about "freeing Jahar," it is about freeing Boston. Killing Jahar won't bring the victims back to life, it won't heal the wounded survivors, and it won't make the public any safer from terrorists. As a local who lived through the events of April 2013, I think the people of Boston would probably heal and move on from these tragedies more efficiently if we showed Jahar the tolerance and compassion he and his brother could not find in their darkest hours. We are Americans, we do not execute our mentally disabled and or feed the least among us to the crocodiles when things go wrong. We do not maim, drug, and assassinate criminals in brutal public spectacles as ISIS does. Boston can rise above these tragic events without putting more blood on our hands.

On April 19, 2013, I told Huffington Post readers about what it felt like to be trapped in my home, "sheltering in place," while authorities combed the streets looking for accused Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar "Jahar" Tsarnaev. It happened two months after I'd moved into my apartment on the Watertown border, but before that I used to live on Harvard Street just blocks from the Tsarnaev's Norfolk Street home in Cambridge. I recalled that in 2010, a clutch of Russian spies was caught living in the house directly behind mine. According to the FBI, the spies had been scouting neighborhood kids as recruits before they were promptly deported.

As the man hunt went on, black hawks, tanks, and SWAT teams were everywhere. When the shelter in place orders were lifted later that day, police located Jahar later that day hiding in a boat on Franklin Street. Our yard was close enough to hear the gun shots. Inside the boat was a note allegedly written by Jahar citing a variety of religious and political grievances he holds against the US government, including his opposition to US military involvement in the war on Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Since Jahar was captured, I have followed his case, and I've attended his trial while covering it for the media. A part of me wants to know the media and the Department of Justice has done due diligence in this case, because if not, there might be a terrorist loose in my neighborhood.

On the first day of trial, Jahar admitted to conspiring with his (now deceased) older brother Tamerlan to detonate two bombs at the Boston Marathon in 2013, killing three and wounding over 200. Jahar is also admitted to participating in the murder of MIT police officer Sean Collier, and carjacking Dun Meng four days later.

Yesterday, Jahar's best friend Steven Silva took the stand and told jurors that he was the person who supplied the gun to Jahar that killed Collier. Silva also told the court that he told Rolling Stone magazine that Jahar "was one of the realest dudes I've ever met in my life." Silva testified to the fact that Jahar was his best friend for years, they dealt marijuana together, but he was in total shock when he heard the news about his friend's alleged involvement with the Marathon bombing because he never saw it coming.

Silva described Jahar as "chill," well liked by his peers, and "the first person I'd call if I needed a ride or a favor. He'd just go, 'I got you, dog' - even if you called him totally wasted at, like, two or three in the morning." He also said that despite Jahar's training in boxing, wrestling, and martial arts, he never got in fights, and rarely got upset. He also said that Jahar's Muslim faith was important to him, but he was far from radicalized.

Up until his arrest in April 2013, Jahar wore Western clothing, drank alcohol, sold and smoked marijuana, had premarital relations with women, was interested in luxury cars, and respected other people's religious beliefs. Silva also said the only thing that really upset Jahar was when people referred to him as a "Russian refugee."

According to Silva, Jahar was very clear that he was Chechyn, not Russian, and that "you can't be both."

The wide spectrum of religious beliefs in this country should be a testament to the Constitutional tenets of freedom this country was founded on. Yet throughout the trial, many have struggled to understand whether Jahar's motives were religious, political, or something else.

During testimony last week, an FBI agent incorrectly identified a picture Jahar posted on Twitter of Grozny, Chechnya, with an image of Mecca. He also confused Jahar's support for the Chechen national soccer team with support for radical Islam.

The Russian Republic of Chechnya is a predominantly Muslim country with a long history of strife with Russia. Violent uprisings between Russia and militant Chechen separatist groups seeking to declare Chechnya an independent Islamic state remain problematic in the region.

Yet the reasons why Jahar identifies so strongly with Chechen separatists is not entirely clear. According to Newsweek, Jahar was never a Chechen national. Although Jahar's father Anzor was born in Chechnya, he grew up in Kyrgyzstan. Jahar's mother Zubeidat was born in Dagestan. Anzor and Zubeidat met and married in Dagestan. Tamerlan was born in Dagestan, and soon after, the family moved to Kyrgyzstan, where Jahar and his two sisters were born. In 1999, Chechen forces invaded Kyrgyzstan, causing the family to flee to Dagestan.

According to Rolling Stone, the Tsarnaev family arrived in the US on a tourist visa in 2002, sought asylum to escape persecution in Kyrgyzstan, and eventually obtained green cards that allowed them to legally reside in the US.

The Tsarnaev's spent their first month in the US living in the Boston-area home of Dr. Khassan Baiev, a Chechen plastic surgeon and friend of Anzor's sister. Baiev was the Chairman of a [now defunct] nonprofit called the International Committee for the Children of Chechnya, which was located at 276 Harvard Street in Cambridge. According to ICCC's 990 tax filings, the tax exempt purpose of the organization was to provide "humanitarian aid to children in Chechnya

To be clear, there is no evidence that Baiev or the ICCC was in any way involved in either the Russian spy incident or the Tsarnaev's horrific crime spree, and I don't to mislead you to think there is. The reason why I mention the Tsarnaev's ties to the ICCC and Baiev is that it shows just how deeply Jahar's family identified with Anzor's Chechyn heritage. And according to Jahar, you can't be Russian too.

Yet according to Newsweek, Anzor used to hang out at the Russian Benevolent Society of Boston. In 2009, Tamerlan filed a report with the Boston Police stating that his father had been brutally beaten by a group of Russians after he offended a woman inside the social club. The incident left Anzor with post-traumatic stress disorder and head injuries so severe that he could not return to work. Anzor was also prone to bouts of depression and severe mood swings. In 2011, Jahar's parents divorced.

Over the years, the Tsarnaev family developed an acrimonious relationship with the US government. By 2012, Zubeidat had been arrested twice for shoplifting, and buy July both Anzor and Zubeidat had permanently immigrated back to Dagestan (where they remain.) By 2013, Tamerlan, Katherine Russell (Tamerlan's wife), and both of Jahar's sisters had been arrested on various charges (some of which are still pending.)

According to this government report, in 2011, Russia notified the US government regarding Tamerlan's alleged involvement with militant Islamic groups in Chechnya, but the warnings were swept under the rug. Defense motions state that Tamerlan may have been an FBI informant who was expected to inform on Chechyn and Muslim communities, an allegation prosecutors say they have no evidence to support.

Congressman Bill Keating also told WGBH that Russia had brought similar concerns about Tamerlan's friend Ibragim Todashev to the attention of US authorities before the Marathon bombings. On May 22, 2013, Todashev was shot and killed by an FBI agent in his own home during a "voluntary" interrogation with authorities. A report released by the Florida State's Attorney clearing the FBI of any wrongdoing states that the FBI first met with Todashev on June 28, 2012, around the same time Zubeidat was arrested for shoplifting. The FBI has not said what that interview with Todashev was about, and there is no evidence that it was connected to any members of the Tsarnaev family.

Last week, Todashev's family filed a lawsuit in Federal court again the US government seeking $30 million in damages for his wrongful death at the hands of the FBI. A member of Todashev's family is expected to testify at Jahar's trial, but the purpose of that testimony has not yet been given.

Although Jahar may have had plenty of axes to grind with the US government, CBS News reported that he took the oath to become an American citizen on Sept. 11, 2012. Seven months later, Jahar was identified as the suspect in the Marathon Bombings.

Perhaps we will never really know why Jahar and his brothers committed such atrocities. Legal experts speculate that Jahar's attorneys admitted culpability for his part in the conspiracy to gain credibility in the eyes of the jury during the death penalty phase of the trial (if he is found guilty.) His defense team has rarely cross-examined witnesses. Judge George O'Toole has said that he "doesn't want to hear one word about Iraq or Afghanistan" during the guilt phase of the trial, and frequently shut down all lines of questioning regarding Jahar's family's culture, heritage and beliefs.

Nonetheless, I hope eventually the trial will shed more light on Tsarnaev's motives so that the public has assurance of not only its' own safety, but the integrity of the system that's supposed to protect us.]]>Ebola Victims Need Compassion, Treatment -- Not Prosecutiontag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2014:/theblog//3.60566582014-10-28T10:06:39-04:002014-12-28T05:59:01-05:00Anne Stevensonhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/anne-stevenson/
While U.S. Centers for Disease Control reports that the prospect of me contracting the Ebola virus from the comfort of my home in suburban America is highly unlikely, it is undisputed that the American government must take a more proactive role in finding a cure for the Ebola virus. Yet the response to to the worldwide Ebola crisis seems to have brought out the worst in everyone. Suddenly, it's OK to hysterically attack or prosecute the world's poorest travelers who come here in search of treatment, then shun the medical professionals who try to help them.

America is a nation of immigrants who came here in search of a better life for their families. This was the case for Liberian cab driver Thomas Eric Duncan, who allegedly did not know he was carrying the Ebola virus last month when he lawfully travelled to Dallas, Texas to marry his fiancé and watch his son graduate from high school. When Duncan started feeling sick, he did exactly what he was supposed to do -- he went to the emergency room at a local hospital to seek treatment for his medical condition, but the hospital misdiagnosed him and sent him home.

As Duncan lay dying in excruciating pain, the Dallas County District Attorney released a statement that their office was "looking into whether or not (he) knowingly and intentionally exposed the public to a deadly virus -- making this a criminal matter." If Duncan had recovered, Liberia also had big plans to prosecute him for allegedly lying on his pre-flight questionnaire about his contact with Ebola and bringing the disease to the U.S. (allegations which his family denies.)

Welcome to America, where our condolences are reserved for those immigrants who are educated in health care policy and treatment, and honest enough to die without a fight on someone else's soil.

Although the CDC reports that there have only been four cases of Ebola diagnosed on American soil (Duncan being the only known case which resulted in death), the world's failure to track Ebola cases calls into question the validity of this statistic.

The World Health Organization reports that over the past 38 years, several Ebola outbreaks have been documented in Sudan, Sierra Leone, Uganda, South Africa, Gabon, Ivory Coast, Liberia, West Africa, Guinea, Nigeria, Zaire, Senegal, Mali, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The World Bank estimates that the average household income in the affected African countries is around $765 per year, and the WHO estimates that the virus proves fatal in anywhere from 25 percent to 90 percent of cases. The WHO estimates that there have been 10,141 diagnosed or suspected cases of Ebola this year resulting in 4,921 deaths in Africa alone.

Even though it would not be unreasonable to assume that over the past 38 years, some Ebola patients have traveled abroad and died undetected in the first world countries unequipped to diagnose or treat them, perhaps the real reason why we have not heard about the domestic prevalence of Ebola is because our health care system only became concerned about the epidemic after the media began shaming sick travelers and the hospitals that were unprepared to deal with them until now.

What WHO's ambiguously broad Ebola death rate range might mean is that for one reason or another, the WHO is unwilling or unable to obtain reliable data on health outcomes for a population that may not be formally reporting the prevalence of the disease. Even if these poor African countries had the resources to track every Ebola case, what would be the point? Who is prepared to respond?

Although the Dallas hospital's failure to properly diagnose and treat Duncan ended in his untimely death and possible spread of the disease, the lack of compassion and outrage expressed for his family's loss is symptomatic of sickly and racist worldwide health care policy that caters only to the interests of corporate profits. The CDC estimates that 109 American children died from the flu last year, another deadly virus for which there is no cure that reaches epidemic proportions nearly every year. None of these children's homes were raided and quarantined by Homeland Security or health officials, the victims were not left homeless and asked to justify to prosecutors why they took the subway to the hospital or went bowling with the sniffles as Ebola patients have been.

The great American Ebola freakout of 2014 seems hardly warranted and only beneficial to those media outlets whose ratings are boosted by their own misleading and damaging coverage of the problem. It seems to me that the American public was OK with Ebola when it was an African problem affecting only black people who were going to die quickly and were too poor to seek treatment in first world countries. Whether the media can change course and begin to help leaders respond to the Ebola crisis appropriately with compassion may turn out to be a true test of how far we have come since the abolition of Jim Crow laws in the 1960's.]]>Fall In Love Just a Little, Oh Little Bit With Hoziertag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2014:/theblog//3.59623362014-10-13T10:02:19-04:002014-12-13T05:59:01-05:00Anne Stevensonhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/anne-stevenson/

Irish born musician Andrew 'Hozier' Byrne's self titled album Hozier was released by Columbia Records two days ago, but nearly every stop on his US tour is sold out already. It's easy to understand why. Although I only discovered Hozier a month ago, his music makes me feel as if I knew who he was with every step that I ran to him.

The first time I heard Hozier's song "Take Me To Church" I was turning onto my street during the last moments of what I thought was a mundane routine commute, but my soul would not let me turn my car off until the tune on the radio finished speaking to it.

There is charmingly familiar and sometimes flawed richness in Hozier's soulful ballads. If I had to describe stylistically who Hozier's parents are, I would say he is the sage love child of Adele, Aretha Franklin and the late Johnny Cash.

According to Billboard, Hozier was born on St. Patrick's Day to a blues musician father who introduced him to the influences of Leonard Cohen, John Lee Hooker and community choral singing. Given Hozier's current popularity, I imagine his mother is not only the proudest mum in Wicklow, but also glad now that her son never took seriously any conventional wisdom to get a "real job" in carpentry after he dropped out of Trinity College to chase his dream.

The entire album is like a vacation from your real life that transports you back to that time in college when you fell for that mysteriously quiet, yet awkwardly sweet kid who brings his guitar everywhere and sits in the back of every class. There is nothing simple about the naïvely honest lyrics of Hozier's songs, but the clear and concise way that he has managed to fashion the sounds of his various guitars make the entire album as addictive as your first love to listen to.

You fall in love with Hozier listening to the optimistically light, catchy song "Someone New" because you probably wouldn't find a guy like Hozier down at the pub with the boys watching a football match. Perhaps when he's not playfully horsing around in your bedroom, he's in his parent's garage perfecting a song to impress you.

"From Eden" is delicious because it was almost certainly written by a guy who doesn't have time to shave or get a haircut, he doesn't remember your birthday, but you know he loves you because he spends 18-hours a day practicing and perfecting the songs he has written about his affection for you and the quirks you didn't know you had.

The song "Cherry Wine" reminds you of the sometimes emotionally addictive and stormy nature of your relationship. You know that the end of the affair will come with graduation because (a) you can't compete with his love for music, (b) your parents convince you that busking on city streets is no way to support a family. In other words, you underestimated him, but it doesn't matter because talent like that has no time for you.

"Take Me to Church" reminds you of how Hozier convinced you to come back the first time you broke up with him before he was ready. It speaks to the inherent purity and righteousness of true love that is easily ruined by the judgments of vicious pessimists.

According to an interview Hozier gave the Irish Independent, he actually wrote this song about the dangers to society of buying into the hateful mantras behind the injustice facing so many LGBT couples in Ireland and Russia.

Although you can't break up with a guy like Hozier until HE'S ready to let go, the song "It Will Come Back" explains how this free spirit will likely linger outside your apartment late at night begging for comfort if you give him any encouragement whatsoever after it's over.

You know you underestimated the polite, soft spoken boy from Bray when you notice his songs about you have gotten more than 2 million hits on YouTube. But if you ever did want to see Hozier play live, good luck, as his show in Dublin last spring sold out 45 seconds after the tickets were released.

Hozier's music will linger in your head long after he exits your life, and you will beg him for more after the album is over. Although I'm not a big concert person, I was heart broken to discover Hozier's Boston shows on October 31st and even March 2015 are sold out -- as is pretty much the case with his entire tour. Nonetheless, I still fall in love just a little oh little bit every day with Hozier;)]]>Scottish Pride, Referendum Inc. and the Mighty 45 Percenttag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2014:/theblog//3.58588362014-09-22T00:49:35-04:002014-11-21T05:59:02-05:00Anne Stevensonhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/anne-stevenson/

In the days leading up to the referendum on Scotland's independence referendum, I published this op-ed in the Huffington Post explaining why I hoped my ancestors would find peace in a free country on Friday morning. Although my hopes were dashed by the prevailing majority who voted against Scottish independence, there are tears of pride in my eyes as I tell you how utterly amazed and inspired I feel at what Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond and the "yes" camp managed to achieve in such a short period of time.

When I was in Scotland a month ago, talk of independence was considered a pipe dream according to polls showing only 35 percent of Scottish voters supported it. By last Friday, an astounding 85 percent of Scottish voters turned up at the polls, and 45 percent of voters cast ballots to stand by a scrappy but mighty campaign army of "Yessers" who beat the odds and bravely stood toe to toe with Westminster's finest.

The Yessers had only two major backers, Business for Scotland group and Willie Walsh, the chief executive of International Airlines Group, which quickly found themselves under fire.

According to the Telegraph, PM Cameron and Westminster's finest had raised an army of 100 large businesses operating in Scotland (banks, oil companies, whiskey producers, media, etc.) to sign a letter pressuring businesses to oppose Scottish independence with them. The oil industry also issued misleading statements casting doubt on the future productivity of Scotland's North Sea oil reserves -- which later turned out to be entirely inaccurate.

In the days leading up to the election, the National Union of Journalists gave a statement telling supporters from both camps to stop intimidating and threatening the safety of journalists reporting on this bloodless revolution, and asking media outlets not to report on media bias complaints leveled against rival outlets.

On the other hand, the British media's fear mongering coverage of the "Yes" campaign was so blatantly absent, biased and inaccurate that the Scottish Police Federation felt compelled to issue the following press release:

As I have previously stated the referendum debate has been robust but overwhelmingly good natured.

It was inevitable that the closer we came to the 18th of September passions would increase but that does not justify the exaggerated rhetoric that is being deployed with increased frequency. Any neutral observer could be led to believe Scotland is on the verge of societal disintegration yet nothing could be further from the truth.

In all my life, I have never seen a finer example of political grassroots organizing than what the Yessers managed to pull off over the past month, when even the previously complacent Queen of England and Prime Minister David Cameron expressed concerns ever polls showing 51 percent of Scots favored independence. It was a sight to behold.

Although Prime Minister David Cameron declared victory and a decisive end to the debate over Scottish independence at 7:01 last Friday morning, his reaction showed the Yessers have Westminster on the run. With the whole world watching, Cameron as much as admitted that he intended to squash Scotland's power because the 53.5 million people currently living in England could not sustain themselves without the subsidies produced by the 8 percent of the UK citizens currently living on Scotland.

Not bad for an underfunded rag tag band of Scots proudly defending their own on just a wee bit of hill and glen! Yessers, don't you dare put your Saltires away -- you are the mighty 45 percent!

Since the referendum, there has been much scrutiny over the way UK leaders, Loyalists and the media conducted themselves during the referendum campaign. As a Democrat who worked on political campaigns prior to 2008, I know a thing or two about the heartbreak of questionable elections supposedly rigged in favor of some of the same business industries behind the "Better Together" campaign. My biggest fear is that the Yessers will get too caught up in mud slinging or referendum rigging conspiracy theories and miss this golden moment in the spotlight to win the hearts and minds of the public.

For now, Yessers seem to be on the right track and riding above the fray. When riots broke out in George Square last Friday, independence leaders told activists to stay home while violent Loyalist mobs took over George Square, saluted the Nazies, assaulted women and children and burned the Saltire while the police stood by and the "Better Together" camp and BBC said virtually nothing. Imagine how the Loyalists would have reacted to a loss!

Perhaps this time around Westminster enjoyed the best referendum money can buy, however, the difference between the value of a pound and a dollar is unlikely to amount to enough to purchase the votes of the Scottish people Westminster has already let down. Within hours of declaring referendum victory, Westminster proposed £4billion in cuts to the Scottish budget and slashed 50,000 Scottish jobs.

If England couldn't get unification right for Scotland after 307 years of trying, they won't get it right next year either. If nothing else, the 71 percent of inspired young voters who backed the independence campaign will surely outlive the 65 percent of elderly voters who voted no to keep the dream alive.

My advice to the Yessers is to hold your heads high, keep your message clear, stay positive and honest, become the party of the people and the people will follow. Build your media support now while all eyes are on you, network in your communities, because the word from Glasgow is that your day in the sun might not be as far off as Westminster hopes. I look forward to watching what happens when Northern Ireland follows suit with their independence and the Scots send the Orange Order homeward -- tae think again.

Alba gu bràth!

]]>Scotland Should Vote Yes for Independence, Yes for the Future of the Scottish Peopletag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2014:/theblog//3.58329622014-09-17T10:48:38-04:002014-11-17T05:59:01-05:00Anne Stevensonhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/anne-stevenson/O Flower of Scotland" are a lot like the American anthem -- if we'd lost the Revolutionary War to the British.

On Thursday, the Scots have a chance to send proud Elizabeth's army homeward, tae think again. As disorganized as this bloodless revolution brewing in Scotland is, and as thick as my Scottish ancestor's blood runs through my veins, I hope the Scottish vote yes to independence, yes for the future of their own people.

If you ever want to see a real Scottish man cry, show them a youtube clip of Amy MacDonald singing "O Flower of Scotland," joined by the Tartan Army before a rugby or football match. This anthem refers to the victory of the Scots, led by Robert the Bruce, over England's Edward II at the Battle of Bannockburn in 1314.

My own grandmother never spoke with me about why her father, William Knox, and his family of weavers and shawl pattern designers immigrated from Paisley, Scotland to Massachusetts. Last month, I spent ten days in Scotland trying to answer this question, and perhaps find a piece of myself in the process.

Treaty of Union in 1707. The union between Scotland and England was supposed to bring peace and prosperity to a nation plagued by nationalist bloodshed, poverty, and mass exodus. Instead, the Knoxes were weavers who existed in an era where their heritage and traditions were outlawed when the clan system and the tartan were banned, and their tax money was sent back to Westminster instead of Edinburgh. But for some reason, my family gave up on Scotland and began immigrating to Massachusetts in the late 1800s.

During my trip, I went camping through the remote Highlands, where I lived out my dream of seeing the neolithic monuments of the Orkney Islands, Cape Wrath, Inverness, and the Island of Skye. Along the way, I spent countless hours listening to the BBC, the only radio station available -- when I could get the signal at all.

At the time, talk of Scottish independence was only just starting to rise, and according to the infinite wisdom of the BBC's biased voices, Scotland had everything it needed and this independence stuff was the talk of nonsense from nationalist extremists.

Much of the discussion revolved around the fate of the Scottish banking system, which at the moment uses the British pound for currency. This week the Telegraph reported that investors have pulled an estimated 17 billion pounds from UK banks in anticipation of Scotland's expected declaration of independence on Thursday. If the Scots stop using the pound, the banking system could be thrown into disarray when the pound loses value while the sustainability of an independent Scottish currency remains unknown.

Apparently, the commentators at the BBC had not driven the roads I was on which were badly in need of paving, and they were not in touch with the many hard working people I met who were getting by day to day working multiple low paying jobs -- if they could find work at all. With the ink still drying on the banking industry's multibillion dollar settlements with the U.S. Department of Justice and almost no one in jail for conspiring to commit the fraud that caused an international banking crisis, no one was asking whether the same fraudsters should be trusted with Scotland's future. In my opinion, the BBC seemed more interested in self-serving fear mongering than any sort of meaningful analysis of what the impending referendum meant for the Scottish people who have to live under Westminster rules.

Two people who know best what it means to be Scottish are Roddy Boyd, who runs a Facebook page called "Oor Wee Toon" dedicated to the history of Paisley (who helped me with my genealogy research), and Jackie MacWilliams, a Glasgow mother of two [grown] sons who was kind enough to let me stay in her spare bedroom for two nights while I poked around in Paisley on the last day of my trip.

Last month, Jackie and her Irish husband Matty were on the fence about Scottish independence, and so I called her on Skype today to find out if there had been any change of circumstances. Jackie told me that both she and Matty would be voting for yes to Scottish independence, for the reasons best stated by Tommy Sheridan in this video.

"Anne you should see it here" Jackie said. "There are mass rallies in the squares in Glasgow crying out for freedom. You won't find that out from the BBC how close we are to it."

When I spoke to Roddy later on he told me his views were also aligned with those of the independence advocacy group Wings Over Scotland.

We very rarely get the Government we vote for and are consistently cheated and lied to by Westminster. We are a rich, intelligent and industrious nation who always have to play second fiddle to the wants of South East England, and there is no reason why we should have to.

I also asked Roddy whether he thought my relatives would be voting for freedom on Thursday, to which he replied "I'm pretty sure your folks would have been up for Independance, the weavers were a fiesty lot and fought for what they wanted!"

Roddy is probably right, and I bet my ancestors would have loved to have lived to cast their votes on Thursday because not much has changed in Paisley since they left except their homes and community have been torn down, abandoned, and left in disrepair.

By the time I arrived in Paisley, all that was left of my family was an unmarked grave in the most prestigious area of the cemetery. Although my great great great grandfather Alexander originally purchased the family plot for his parents, eventually there were 8 bodies in a grave intended for two, and the day of my visit was the anniversary of Alexander's death. Atop the grave was a feather that seemed to be waiting for me, telling me to write something.

What I want to tell my brothers and sisters in Scotland is that as an American, none of my father's ancestors from England who came to America as pilgrims then became Minute Men who fought in the American Revolution to free us from British tyranny have ever looked back on history and wanted to trade in the dollar for the pound.

There are worse problems facing Scotland right now if it doesn't free itself, and having the value of an independent Scottish currency dip below the current value of a pound to equal the dollar is not one of them. But the Scots don't have to shed blood to be free like we did, all they have to do is vote in their own favor on Thursday. Hopefully, I will live to see the folks in Northern Ireland follow Scotland's lead in my lifetime as well.

As Jackie put it best,

"Even if the oil in the North Sea dries up, even if I have to pay my dues by way of higher mortgage rates and grocery prices, I'm willing to do that if it means I can wake up Friday morning in a free country and sing 'O Flower of Scotland' with pride."

]]>Why Joe Biden Is Exactly Right About the Ray Rice Casetag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2014:/theblog//3.58012402014-09-11T09:55:11-04:002014-11-11T05:59:01-05:00Anne Stevensonhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/anne-stevenson/all the justice money can buy him, there are still people out there willing to throw public safety and the integrity of the courts under the bus to save Rice from himself for the sake of Sunday sports entertainment.

Vice President Joe Biden said something very important this week during this interview with the Today Show in response to the aftermath of TMZ's release of the footage of Rice assaulting his wife:

"It's never, never, never the woman's fault. No man has a right to raise a hand to a woman. No means no. [...] The one regret I have is we call it domestic violence as if it's a domesticated cat. It is the most vicious form of violence there is, because not only the physical scars are left, the psychological scars that are left. This whole culture for so long has put the onus on the woman. What were you wearing? What did you say? What did you do to provoke? That is never the appropriate question."

Like Biden, I too reserve my concerns for the victims of violent crimes and the interests of public safety, but I could care less about Rice being able to keep his good name or his job, or whether my Sunday football experience will be the same without him. Rice chose to be a violent offender, and since he took that risk at the expense of public safety, Rice deserves to lose his good name and his prominent position within the NFL, and he should have done jail time.

Biden is right, it's time to stop using court industry buzz words like "abuser" and "domestic dispute" to describe violent offenders and the crimes they commit. "Abuse" is not necessarily a crime so much as morally reprehensible conduct and a subjectively evaluated personal problem. The term "domestic abuse" is so vague that it is used to describe anything from a heated argument to a triple homicide, then imputes blame to the victim for knowing the attacker while concealing the inherent threat to public safety that violent predators like Rice pose to society.

Since the cops can only arrest the jerks who are also crime suspects, shouldn't advocates should be teaching victims of violent crimes to use more specific descriptors like "violent offender" and "criminal assault" that accurately reflect the crime scenes where the predator targeted them? Why don't they?

NFL, COURTS KNEW WHAT THEY WERE DOING IN RICE CASE

Judges and prosecutors are given a public salary to understand violent criminals and protect the public from them, the NFL is not.

Scott Benner wrote that nothing about the NFL's handling of the cover up in the Rice case should be shocking given their history of putting violent criminals like Michael Vick on the field post-conviction. A PBS Frontline report about the NFL's "concussion crisis" shows why the NFL is just a for-profit corporation with no meaningful obligation to protect their own player's safety, never mind protect the public at large from their walking Sunday afternoon investments. That's the justice system's job.

At this point, I'm going to stop using the term "justice system" because I don't think it applies to the New Jersey courts, as I'm unable to perceive a legitimate explanation for how public safety and justice was served when the court waived the law [that is supposed to apply equally to all New Jersey citizens] in order to let Rice off the hook without meaningful consequences.

According to ESPN, on May 20, New Jersey Superior Court Judge Michael A. Donio approved Rice's enrollment into a pre-trial intervention program for non-violent offenders who commit victimless crimes (which Rice was presumably not eligible for,) then approved an agreement sanctioned by the District Attorney's office which allowed Rice receive anger management counseling in lieu of actual criminal penalties -- provided that Rice did not get caught assaulting the victim again.

The Ravens suggest that the fact that the victim did not cooperate and gave a public apology for her attacker's choice to knock her out cold at a press conference [hosted by the Ravens] should be considered. As if the publicity mavens at the NFL don't know that throwing the word "domestic" into any headline shifts the blame away from the offender by implying that the whole family has problems that could be solved with a little therapy (instead of offender accountability).

These arguments are entirely irrelevant given that there is no lack of evidence or need for the victim's cooperation in the Rice case. To the contrary, the court has an obligation to act lawfully and in the interests of public safety by going forward with the case against Rice.

Yet the message from both the NFL and the New Jersey courts to violent crime victims is shockingly similar, which to say that even if your attacker is caught on tape assaulting you in a public elevator, best case scenario is that the criminal proceedings and publicity fury will destroy the victim's reputation, and even if he is found guilty, both the NFL and the court will reward the offender with services to help HIM recover.

RICE CASE -- BUSINESS AS USUAL?

Former prosecutor Wendy Murphy says that instead of throwing tax dollars at the problem, it's high time for the public to "take a closer look at the gushing flow of money from DC that literally rewards violent male offenders with cash, therapy and training programs AFTER they get in trouble with the courts for assaulting the crime victims who live with them."

At the time, Murphy was referring to the case of legendary Red Sox announcer Jerry Remy's son Jared, who was convicted this year of stabbing his fiancé Amy Martel to death in front of their 4-year-old daughter just hours after he was arrested and released from jail for assaulting her. At the time of the murder, Remy was a veteran of the Massachusetts probation department's pre-trial "free walk" drug and anger management counseling programs. By September 2011, Remy's privately bankrolled defense attorney Peter Bella had convinced Massachusetts judges to close a staggering 18 cases charging Remy with dozens of traffic, violence and/or drug related related offenses. Only twice in 20-years did the courts find Remy guilty, and on ten occasions, the courts outright dismissed the charges against him. Remy was also granted six continuances without findings (CWOF's) that resulted in dismissals.

According to Bella, there was no "pay to play" scandal involved with Remy's case because his client never received any special treatment from the courts, this is just some deadly business as usual.

Given that much of the Massachusetts Probation Department's own staff stood trial for racketeering, bribery, and conspiracy, I'm appalled to see headlines suggesting that taxpayers should throw money down the toilet to give their highly educated cronies more training. Isn't it enough that many of their cohorts have already received immunity in exchange for their testimony? Never mind Jared Remy's track record, are these professionals safe and morally qualified to work for the State if they don't recognize the basic signs of criminal activity in the departments they spend eight hours a day, five days a week working in?

It is almost as if the OJ Simpson cases have taught us nothing about how the difference between a violent predator being found "not guilty" and a prosecutor's ability to meet the legal burden of proof required to convict is often a function of how much "justice" and bad press coverage of the victim a defendant can afford.

According to studies funded by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, as many as 1 in 4 U.S. children will experience maltreatment in their lifetimes, and the total lifetime cost of child maltreatment in the United States is approximately $124 billion. Although there are no studies I am aware of which show how much of this money ends up in the hands of crooked attorneys and judges, there's no denying that $124 billion is a pretty powerful financial incentive for unethical court and health industry professionals to hand deliver crime victims to offenders like Rice.

Rather than throwing more money at the problem, perhaps it's time to defund offender-friendly courts like those in New Jersey and Massachusetts that pose a threat to public safety, which would in itself be an investment in victim protection and recovery. Maybe what victims really need is support and understanding from the media and the public, and some accountability and transparency from the legal system.]]>The Power Of A Powerless Moment In Timetag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2014:/theblog//3.55902112014-07-16T02:21:27-04:002014-09-14T05:59:06-04:00Anne Stevensonhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/anne-stevenson/
Since then, my life has improved exponentially, and I have the job of my dreams doing research and writing stories for several publications that empower victims of unimaginable horrors who cannot speak for themselves. Thus, when Arianna came to Tufts University [my alma mater] to speak last spring, it was essential for me to take the day off from work and seize the opportunity to say thank you to her. On my way in the door, I purchased a copy of Arianna's new book, Thrive, which she signed for me as I nervously fumbled words while trying to explain in a small moment to her how much her act of kindness had meant to me and so many others.

Arianna's latest book held for me many valuable insights about the power of a moment in time, that sleep is more valuable than caffeine and the false appearance of productivity, and the need to turn off our devices and tune into ourselves. And I remember thinking to myself that things like the "Unplugged Challenge" are the types of insights and activities people can afford to participate in after they have already made it big and struck it rich. Until I actually did it, and it did change my life for the better in ways I never imagined possible.

For me, turning off my phone during Fourth of July weekend was not necessarily voluntary so much as a product of a value decision that came down in favor of life's essentials. It was the week before my son left for sleepover camp, and I needed things like the rent paid and groceries, I needed to take my child on the birthday camping trip in Maine I had already paid for last winter, and I needed to follow through with my commitment to host and train Milo [a young man affiliated with a child advocacy nonprofit who had flown out from California that week]. The phone I just wanted and could survive without. So I just didn't pay the bill for two weeks.

Funny things started to happen when you shut your phone off, one of them being that you discover how long it would take the people in your life to notice if [God forbid] you suddenly dropped dead one day in your own home. The other thing that happens is that you see more of people's faces and become more aware of the people who are in your life, and how much quality time you spend with them.

Since the day my son was conceived, I have known my child better than I know myself. My child is my satellite, and I can feel his energy around me no matter where he is in the universe. All of my achievements in life have only come about because of my eternal quest to please my son, to improve our corner of the universe and make him proud of me. We have shared many laughs together because he knows how much I hate ice cream, yet while I was pregnant I used to eat it all the time because I knew from the enthusiastic acrobatics I could feel him performing inside me as a gesture of thanks that he loved the taste. To this day, ice cream is the only dessert I consistently keep in the house because my child loves it and there is no risk that I will be the one eating it.

During that Fourth of July weekend, it felt amazing to walk down the beach in Maine with my child where my attention was 100-percent present in the moment, skipping rocks across the surf. We held a fishing derby in a small pond in the woods for several hours where we caught nothing but laughs and a few tree branches.

Yet as I watched my child and his friends on the beach, I could not take my eyes off them for a number of reasons, one of them being that my son kept looking back at me to see if I was paying attention, then he would smile and wave to me to let me know he was having fun. It was then that I realized the reason why my child did this so frequently that afternoon was that he was not used to catching my gaze, and that consequently, I had probably missed a lot of those moments.

I want you to know that there are tears streaming down my face as I write this. What breaks my heart is that all my son was asking me for was to see my smile, to please me with a gesture of his own happiness and to encourage me to be happy with him. He wanted something so badly that was small and reasonable, which is why I now deeply regret my past choices to give my gaze and approval to a 5 inch x 2.3 inch. hunk of plastic connected to people who were not there instead of him. Who ever I was probably texting last summer at the beach could not possibly have needed or appreciated me nearly as much as my child does.

Over time, what happened was that my investment in a noisy hunk of plastic created a crisis in values, which I then imposed upon my child because I kept sending the wrong message to my son about how much I valued the things that are important to him. A year ago, the highlight of his day was probably the hug I gave him after he successfully skipped a rock seven times across the surface of the water, but did I miss this event while texting then lie and tell him I saw it to save myself the moment it would have taken to look up and see it first hand for myself?

The truth is I don't know the answer to that question, but I knew then that I could not buy or steal back the privilege of viewing the moments my son loved so dearly that he would rehash the story of the rock 50 times to ensure that if I hadn't seen it, I still wouldn't forget it.

The other realization I came to while watching my son play with his friends at the beach was that it was not too long ago that all of these kids were literally the size of a footballs, and now they were old enough to flirt with each other. When I offered my son ice cream, he ran off on the girl he was talking to, then returned to share it with her. On one hand I was touched by my son's kind spontaneous gesture, but how many moments like this did I realistically have left before I was too "uncool" to hang out with my child and his friends?

Actually, that moment had already passed the year before when my son met that girl and explained to me in not so many words that I was the most embarrassing mother on a beach full of parents who were mostly happily graying hippies wearing tie dye shirts. The only reason my son allowed me to watch the Fourth of July fireworks with him this year was that the girls he flirted with that insisted I stay. But it was not because I was suddenly "the cool mom" again, it was that these girls were trying to impress my little mamma's boy by currying my favor.

This is in itself a terrifying reality for any mother to face, but the worst part was actually that I knew by then that how decoratively useless I was because the kids would have been just as safe and happy if I had chosen to sit 20 feet away. And when I had outlived my usefulness, they all went and got slurpies with my money, then came back and sat somewhere else. But my son still kept looking back at me to see if I was watching, and sometimes he would dash over to give me a hug if I was lucky.

Cooking meals from scratch is something I love to do because it is one of the most important ways to show people, particularly little boys, that you love them. Yet when I got I it became abundantly clear that had slacked off on shopping and meal preparation. Ironically, it was only without the possibility of a phone dragging me away that I was able to make my son some fantastic meals before I dropped him off at camp in New Hampshire last weekend.

Sending my son to Man Camp used to be a break for me, but this year was different. After I watched my son scamper off into the woods so happy to be with his friends, I rushed to the car because I did not want ruin his moment by letting him see me cry. As I drove away, there was no one I could talk to because I still didn't have a phone.

On the way home, I stopped Wolfgang's Pizza and asked if I could get a slice to go for the long drive. The guy at the counter said "Usually yes, but I am working alone today and it's after the lunch hour when we sell pizza by the slice." He actually was about to dash and see what he could offer, when I realized I didn't have to rush off, I could order what ever I wanted. And thankfully I did because that Greek pizza was the best pizza I have ever had. Since I didn't have my phone, pacing the floor impatiently while it was made was not an option, so I read a magazine at a table instead. When the man handed it to me, we had this moment where he asked me if I was surprised how quickly he had made the pizza, and when I thanked him I saw a huge smile come across his face that I likely would have missed just a few weeks before if my phone when my phone was still in service.

How many people have over the years gone out of their way to be kind to me, but I never noticed because I was on the phone?

On the way home, I thought about many of the relationships I no longer maintained, and stopped to say hello to old friends without calling first. Though it is taboo to do this, you would not believe how happy these friends were to see me after so many years.

Although I never told anyone the reason why my phone was off, by the time I arrived home, there were emails waiting for me from people who had heard through the grapevine that I was disconnected and who wanted to help me. Someone I barely knew had already gone and bought me a phone that was way better than anything I have ever owned. Most of the people who reached out were victims whose lives I had touched through stories I had written, and but the offer that surprised me most, the most generous offer, came from someone who I had written off years ago after many epic battles which produced no victories for anyone. It was a moment of healing for us that was long over due. You all know who you are, and I am so grateful to you for reminding me of the goodness that exists in my world.

Lastly, thank you Arianna for everything you have done for me and the wisdom you shared which has allowed me to better appreciate the wonderful world my son and I share.]]>How Exceptional Massachusetts Lawmakers Embody the Spirit of Foster Care Awareness Monthtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2014:/theblog//3.51397082014-04-19T03:09:39-04:002014-06-18T05:59:03-04:00Anne Stevensonhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/anne-stevenson/National Foster Care Awareness Month, and the courageous actions of leaders like Massachusetts state representatives Jim Lyons (R-Andover) and Marc Lombardo (R-Billerica) should remind us that it stands as an opportunity to challenge our leaders to improve the way the State does business to assist some 400,000 foster kids nationwide in need of permanent homes and connections.

In Massachusetts, the agency which oversees child maltreatment and State dependency cases does not refer to itself as Child Protective Services, rather, they are more aptly entitled the Department of Children and Families (DCF).

Last month, representatives Lyons and Lombardo filed House Docket No.4157 "Resolutions Acknowledging Serious Concerns regarding DCF's handling of the Justina Pelletier Case" in response to Juvenile Court Judge Joseph Johnson's decision to keep the lifelong Connecticut resident permanently in DCF custody on the grounds that the State doesn't like her parent's attitude. The decision comes less than a year after a judge dismissed a federal lawsuit filed by watchdog agency Children's Rights which alleged that DCF "routinely" places children in "dangerous and unstable situations."

There are now at least 35 other legislators who also want to know how much money is being spent on the Pelletier matter. They are correct to question the competence and propriety of a State agency and a judge who needed over a year, as well as dozens of expensive legal and medical professionals to help them decide a single case involving a non-state resident child with two fit and feisty parents.

Until a year ago, Justina was a flourishing 14-year-old girl diagnosed with mitochondrial disease who lived with her parents in Connecticut, but received successful treatment for her deadly metabolic condition at Tufts Medical Center in Boston. Her parents told the Boston Globe that back then, Justina had an active social life and took part in figure skating competitions.

Today, Justina is a wheelchair-bound ward of the state who has been warehouse for over a year in psychiatric facilities with no substantial access to her family and friends, and reportedly has resorted to scrawling SOS letters begging for physical protection from the same State workers charged with her care.

According to the Globe, Justina's decline arguably started in February 2013 when the Pelletier's took Justina to Boston Children's Hospital to be seen for the flu while her Tufts doctor was on vacation. Instead, BCH diagnosed Justina with somatoform disorder, which according to experts interviewed by the Boston Globe, is either a controversial psychiatric condition not universally accepted by the mainstream mental health community, or a clinically acceptable way of calling someone physically disabled a hypochondriac (take your pick).

The magnitude of the State's mistakes is difficult to determine because like all dependency cases heard in Massachusetts, Justina's case was heard behind closed doors and the file was sealed from public disclosure. Yet the measures currently pending in the Massachusetts legislature show just how concerned lawmakers are that BCH may have [intentionally or unintentionally] caused Justina to be placed in State care so that her alleged mistreatments could continue at their facility.

The State should never remove a child from a fit parent's care simply because that parent has a disposition that poses an inconvenience for an enterprising hospital and/or some misguided meddling social workers, but is not indicative of the parent's capability to effectively make decisions or raise their child. If this is not the case with Justina's family, Judge Johnson's recent decision raises a lot of questions about the propriety of the State's decisions.

If I had the opportunity, I would ask Judge Johnston the following questions:

If you believe that BCH's diagnosis was correct, why did you place Justina back under the care of the same Tufts doctors who allegedly misdiagnosed her in the first place? If the parents have been correct all along, why not to allow them to be kept apprised of or participate in their own child's medical care?

Since Connecticut DCF has already deemed the Pelletiers to be fit parents, why did you decide not to allow Justina to return home unless CT DCF re-opens the case and takes custody of Justina? Why do you think CT DCF would not agree to take Justina, if for no other reason other than to put the Pelletiers and Massachusetts taxpayers out of their misery?

Regardless of whether the State has made what turns out to be a fatal mistake, the Pelletiers have already lost the legal right to decide what protected information is released and whether or not an autopsy is necessary. This is particularly disturbing in light of a recent Boston Globe report that found that:

Over all, children who received services from social workers at DCF in 2010 were about six times as likely as the general population of Bay State children to die from maltreatment, according to the state's own calculations.

While some State leaders argue that the solution is to throw more money at the problem to put more cooks in DCF's kitchen, Lombardo and Lyons insist financial accountability must be part of the equation.

This month the two outstanding advocates used their professional platform to introduce Amendment #609 to H.4000, "An Amendment to Account for DCF Spending on the Justina Pelletier Case." In doing so, the representatives keenly pointed out mistakes in dependency cases aren't just costly for taxpayers, they are often deadly for children.

"The administration has indicated that DCF lacks the resources necessary to carry out their duties." says Lombardo. "If this is true, why is DCF spending what appears to be endless amounts of money fighting to keep a loving family and their daughter apart? With over 130 children under DCF care currently missing, it might be time for DCF to reevaluate their priorities."

In light of the recent indictments of several Massachusetts probation department heads working in the courts on federal racketeering and corruption charges, the smell of a local "patients for cash" scandal akin to the Pennsylvania Juvenile Court's "kids for cash" scandal will probably only continue to grow stronger as Justina's health continues to decline in State care. At the very least, most legitimate Massachusetts decision makers would probably agree that existing laws are clear that fit and feisty parents everywhere should be able to rest assured that that State will not terminate their relationship with their sick children just for walking into the wrong hospital.

As a Massachusetts Democrat, I think that perhaps from here on out, instead of trying to mitigate any liability Massachusetts may face for botching the Pelletier case, the Governor and the State's child protection agencies should seize the opportunity to correct their mistake and the fit and feisty parents who know Justina best can take her home and assume responsibility for her care. Their failure to do so is making us all look bad.]]>Why The Kardashians Are More Responsible Than JP Morgan's Leadershiptag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.43180922013-11-26T08:43:31-05:002014-01-26T05:59:02-05:00Anne Stevensonhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/anne-stevenson/$13 billion global settlement with the welfare kings at JP Morgan for its role in "knowingly bundling toxic loans and selling them to unsuspecting investors." Although they admitted to the fraud, no one from JP Morgan was required to do jail time under the agreement. Consumer protection advocate Senator Elizabeth Warren and her colleagues expressed their outrage in a letter to the DOJ over the fact that JP Morgan's settlement my be partly tax deductible.

To make matters worse, fraudster JP Morgan is on the public assistance roles, receiving as much as $14 billion per year in "free" money from the government. No, their CEOs are not enrolled in the types of welfare programs that the victims of their scams might have been forced onto, such as food stamps, section 8 housing assistance, social security, or Medicaid-programs which are now experiencing deep cuts.

The IMF figures that big banks pay about 0.8 percentage points less in interest to borrow, compared with ordinary mortal banks that have the misfortune of not being too big to fail. That lower interest rate translates into about $76 billion per year for the 18 biggest U.S. banks, Bloomberg writes, of which JPMorgan's share is $14 billion. Fun fact: That $76 billion is more than enough to pay for the $30 billion in extended unemployment benefits that are set to expire at the end of the year...This figure does not include the $12 billion windfall JPMorgan and other big banks are expected to get from the government's HARP refinancing program -- which, again, JPMorgan is only taking advantage of for the good of the country.

Again, JP Morgan just admitted to the DOJ that they used their welfare benefits to run an international fraud ring, and yet no one is going to jail for it. That's the difference between JP Morgan fraudsters and the average single parent on welfare (>80 percent of whom are battered women) who will actually have to do jail time if caught selling their food stamps to make ends meet.

While the EBT fraud scandal has certainly put a bee in the Tea Party's bonnet, I don't expect the same conservative representatives to begin flooding Capitol Hill with bills that will in any way meaningfully restrict the banking industry's activities. No, the Tea Party has yet to propose laws which would require JPM CEO Jamie Dimon and his cronies to be drug tested as a condition of receiving welfare, they will not be forced to make their private necessity purchases on government tracked EBT cards, and social workers will not be making random visits to their homes to second guess their parenting skills and root through their private belongings.

The bigger question is, What will JP Morgan's CEOs do with all the freedom and plunder the DOJ has generously allowed them to keep?

It's as if the DOJ was taking notes out of the Kardashian family's deal with the E! network to make a show called "Keeping Us Down With The Banking Industry."

You see "Keeping Up With the Kardashians" is a show based on ideals that I would consider to be the toxic remnants of the Reagan era's over the top and drug fueled partying, narcissism, self indulgence and waste -- with absolutely no regard for the future consequences of their own actions. Based on the few episodes I've seen, the Kardashian family spends most of their days pre-occupied with themselves, sneering at their cell phones, changing their clothes, "getting glam," and getting in cat fights. Kardashians constantly indulge themselves with various luxury items and services to sooth the [self inflicted and very profitable] "pain" of the media spotlight.

But what bothers me most about the Kardashian lifestyle is that (much like JP Morgan's leadership) they seem to be absolutely oblivious to just how offensive their lavish and wasteful life choices are to the average "fan" who is struggling to make ends meet. Although you may not be able to locate a single book shelf in any of the Kardashian's mansions, you will always be able to locate the party, the spa, and the rehab center.

Instead of setting an example for young girls by furthering their own education or contributing something meaningful to society, Kardashians spend their time throwing themselves inappropriately lavish parties that would put the Great Gatsby to shame. Sure, the proceeds from some of these parties may go to charity, but since when is it OK to teach your kids that throwing YOURSELF an extravagant [tax deductible?] Sweet Sixteen bash is actually doing poor kids a favor? Does a 16-ear-old need a couple Mercedes SUVs more than a tour to visit prospective colleges? Since when does anyone going on their third marriage need a $8 million engagement ring?

To their own credit, the family told Barbara Walters that it doesn't claim to have any discernible "talents," and they don't market themselves as the best entertainers in the world. Perhaps all the E! network may require of a Kardashian really is to cut yourself off from the struggles of the minions and spend overtime promoting your own superficial image?

How is the E! network's work ethos any different than the process of becoming a banker, which requires one to cut themselves off from all meaningful ties to society to work 90+ hours a week for a soulless employer?

The difference between the Kardashians and the banking industry is that (a) the Kardashians appear to only waste their own money, (b) the government actually prosecutes and incarcerates reality stars who engage in fraud, and (c ) the legal system has actually spawned reforms in the way the media industry treats its interns, while a banking industry intern may have died of exhaustion-related causes after being allowed to work three days without sleep.

The irony of it all is that until recently, the only real oversight of the banking industry we had came from the same media outlets shoving the Kardashians down our throats. Dimon would probably face more severe personal sanctions for a risqué appearance on the Howard Stern Show than he is now for his role in the financial crisis.

Perhaps the best that taxpayers can hope for now is that these banking crooks will retire, and a new, more honest breed of bankers will replace them. My suspicion is that since the crooks are still free to strike again, they will "retire" and try to recast themselves as "philanthropists." Perhaps they may continue to regift our stolen mortgages and retirement accounts back to us in the form of rigged elections funded by dark money fueled nonprofits, a portion will go to tax write offs masked as charities. Don't forget investment in continuing lobbying efforts that ensure the vast majority of the Wall Street's wealth stays firmly within the grasp of the concentrated few to the detriment of the nation's over all economic growth.

Apparently, the DOJ and the banking industry are not willing or able to enter into the types of pro-consumer agreements which might benefit the wealthy by requiring them to have a smaller share of a larger, more regulated stabile economy that grows at a healthier rate.

Money is opportunity, and Senator Warren is right to be concerned that Americans shouldn't be "fighting each other for a handful of crumbs." Only Peter Pan believes that you can obtain all the benefits in life without having to put the elbow grease into earning your piece of the pie. Should we continue to teach our kids that they can't cut corners, they must work hard in school to get good grades and pay for college, then spend years building a solid reputation in their field to get ahead? What message will our children take away from the DOJ's deal with JP Morgan?]]>Is Judicial Activism the Panacea for Legislative Inaction?tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.32236652013-05-09T14:39:37-04:002013-07-09T05:12:02-04:00Anne Stevensonhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/anne-stevenson/President Barack Obama:

"The whole design of these arbitrary cuts was to make them so unattractive and unappealing that Democrats and Republicans would actually get together and find a good compromise of sensible cuts as well as closing tax loopholes and so forth. And so this was all designed to say we can't do these bad cuts; let's do something smarter. That was the whole point of this so-called sequestration."

We understand that the democratic process is, by nature, adversarial. When the forefathers drafted the Constitution, they deliberately made provisions for the fact that we needed more than one political party precisely because the founders disagreed on fundamental issues.

What bothers me about the president's statement is that it clearly acknowledges the fact that the government is not gearing its message to reach the everyday American family who will be most affected by the "bad cuts." Instead, politicians are gearing their messages toward... other politicians, who will always have a job and health care so long as they are reelected.

The word "sequestration" is in itself pundit speak that creates one more layer of alienation between struggling American voters and the inaccessible politicians who represent them. We know what across the board cuts are, but when you repackage that as a measure of austerity, we feel as though we are not qualified to have a conversation with our leaders. Aren't elected officials supposed to work for us?

Nonetheless, struggling families continue to lose homes, jobs, and health care while Congress fails to pass or even vote on various laws that are supposed to protect consumers.

Citing the Supreme Court's reluctance to invoke the First Amendment in commercial regulation cases, pundit George F. Will says perhaps we need to pressure Supreme Court activists to balance the scales. Will supports his position by citing a recent federal case challenging the Total Price Rule, where the airline industry argued that "the government is micromanaging their speech merely to prevent the public from understanding the government's tax burdens."

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ultimately upheld the law, which requires airlines to advertise the pre-tax price of an airline ticket in a larger font than the additional 20 percent in taxes the consumer will also have to pay if they want to fly the friendly skies. Will concluded that:

Government is violating one of the natural rights that the Founders said government is "instituted" (the Declaration's word) to protect. This episode confirms conservatism's premise that today's government is guilty of shabby behavior until proven innocent. And conservatives enable such behavior when their unreflective denunciations of judicial "activism" encourage excessive judicial deference toward the modern executive's impetuous vortex.

(Anne tilts her head, shakes side to side, stares blankly at computer screen.)

What did you just say, George? Despite the fact that I have a bachelor's degree in political science from a top university and went to law school, I still had to whip out my trusty Miriam Webster's dictionary to translate this paragraph. For a minute there, I felt like I was back in law school using Wikipedia to translate the most recent Supreme Court decisions.

Will is correct that the Supreme Court should invoke the First Amendment more often to benefit consumers. The problem with Will's argument is that if the purpose of the law is to give notice to citizens of their societal burdens and benefits, the Supreme Court gets an "F" from me. The fact that in order to practice law, you must obtain three or more academic degrees, then pass the bar exam should tell you that lawmakers never intended for the average bear to fully comprehend the scope of their own legal rights.

In fact, there's an entire study aid industry dominated by corporations like Barbary, Crunchtime, Emmanuel's, and Kaplan which probably rakes in tens of millions in profits selling overpriced summaries of Supreme Court case decisions to desperate aspiring law students. The same law students will then go on to charge desperate litigants hundreds of dollars per hour to have a conversation with a judge on their behalf. If the average consumer wants to represent themselves, they likely will have to do it without the benefits of expensive databases like Westlaw and Lexis Nexis. You the average consumer will have to go to the local law library during business hours and pray that that their publications are still relevant. Even if the information is current, trying to understand case law this way is like trying to teach yourself a foreign language without Rosetta Stone. The consumer is still at a disadvantage in the courtroom, and will often be told by the judge to "go get a lawyer."

At the same time we lament cuts to education and the "dumbing down" of our news outlets, we also need to remember that government has an obligation to speak clearly to all citizens. If you love America for its diversity, bootstraps, and endless possibilities, you also have to accept that the people who built your house, carted away your garbage, prepared your dinner, babysat your child, cleaned your home, or washed your laundry are not burdens on society, they are valuable contributors whom our government is obligated to communicate with effectively.

It was, after all, bankers, lawyers, and politicians who crashed the economy, not carpenters, farm workers, and burger flippers. If we are going to use sequestration as an excuse to crack down on the poor's corresponding reliance on public assistance, then perhaps we need to demand more transparency from individual congressmen and judges to explain to us in plain language where our corporate welfare has gone. That would be a start.]]>Live From the Cambridge Combat Zonetag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.31161942013-04-19T10:58:54-04:002013-06-19T05:12:01-04:00Anne Stevensonhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/anne-stevenson/just blocks from where I am, and they are hunting down the terrorist(s) allegedly responsible for the Boston Marathon bombing. The place is a combat zone. It feels like a snow day because there's no one outside. The only thing you hear is an unsettling quiet interrupted by helicopters buzzing, sirens, and police trucks going by. Local friends in a position to know have called to say don't go outside, it could be a while.

Strangely, it's not the first time I've been in this position. The first time was just after the 9/11/2001 hijackings that changed our lives forever. The hijackers had actually shopped at my work just days before the bombings. After 9/11, we were inside for days, then returned to work while the hunt for Osama bin Laden ensued.

The second time I was in the midst of a terrorist attack was in 2002 when I lived in Gaithersburg, Maryland. The authorities were looking for John Muhammad, the Beltway Sniper, who shot 13 people. For a month, the entire Washington, D.C. area was paralyzed and afraid to so much as go for a walk in their own yard. Since then, Muhammad's ex-wife Mildred and I have become friends. She says we have to stay positive and not let John's sins stop us from living our lives.

The third time was in the summer of 2010. After work, I returned home to find the SWAT team had surrounded my apartment. They arrested a few Russian spies in the house next door, then quickly spirited them out of the country. The spies had recruited boys in the neighborhood to assist them. The media stories were more focused on the attractive nature of the spies than they were the danger they might pose to my family and my neighbors.

Last October, when Hurricane Sandy struck while I was out-of-town, I panicked because my family was still home. Although it was not a terrorist attack, I experienced the same sick feeling that I might not have said everything I needed to say to my loved ones. After that, I started throwing my back into it to be sure they knew how much I loved them. Just little things, like cooking more family dinners and taking weekends off to do fun things with them.

Last Monday, my family had tickets to a museum on Boylston Street that would have taken us right into the area where the bombings occurred. We were going to avoid crowds and go the museum in the afternoon, but the bombings occurred instead.

The first suspect in the Marathon bombings was killed just two blocks from my son's school. Thankfully, it's April vacation this week, and so Cambridge children are home with their parents while these atrocities unfold in our yards.

On Monday, I told my family that since the FBI had swarmed the neighborhood looking for suspects, we were in the safest area in Massachusetts. Go about your routine, don't let terrorists take any more time from us than they already had.

Is Cambridge a terrorist hotbed? The discussion I'm having with my family is that they are justified in being scared, but we can't stop living our lives. Maybe at this moment we can't go outside, but we can make the most of our day together. Yes, there are bad people out there, and sometimes they do terrible things and we don't know why. Perhaps they don't know why they do these things, and so we have little assurance that anyone could stop the evil chain of events they are responsible for.

Most importantly, we usual citizens can only control ourselves. We must impress upon our children that these attacks were not committed by Muslims, they were committed by terrorists. We must be safe, but I won't let terrorists take our Muslim friends too. While we hope law enforcement gets a handle on this situation soon, it looks like it could be a while. Maybe never.]]>Recommendations for a Prosperous Post-2014 Afghanistantag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.22679182012-12-13T15:00:35-05:002013-02-12T05:12:01-05:00Anne Stevensonhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/anne-stevenson/This week, Mustafa Yasa, director of foreign relations for the Municipality of Kabul, has joined me in writing this column. We plan to share with readers our observations on how Afghanistan and the U.S. can work more efficiently and effectively to transform the country from a post-conflict society to an economically independent nation and formidable competitor in the world market.

"Afghanistan must stand on its own feet, and the only foundation that will support this emerging nation is the ground we stand on. Fortunately the ground under our feet is mineral rich," Sadat Mansoor Naderi, chairman of the Afghan Gold and Minerals Company told participants last week at the Afghan-American Chamber of Commerce (AACC) 8th Annual U.S.-Afghanistan Business Matchmaking Conference (BMC) held in Washington, D.C.

At the present time, Afghanistan remains a donor economy reliant on international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) for financial support. While the mineral industry may be Afghanistan's most promising asset, there are currently no long-term plans in place to facilitate the kind of stable and sustainable infrastructure needed to ensure Afghanistan's future as an independent, sovereign economy.

In 2014, the U.S. plans to reduce the number of American troops in Afghanistan from 101,000 in June 2012 to 10,000 U.S. soldiers withdrawing by the end of this year. Since 2001, the U.S. has invested $1.2 trillion tax dollars in the war in Afghanistan, over 17,644 U.S. soldiers stationed in Afghanistan been injured, and more than 2,000 U.S. Soldiers have been killed. Yet despite the high transaction costs of war, total withdrawal of U.S. troops seems highly unlikely where the Pentagon and the U.S. Geological Survey estimate that Afghanistan, and consequently our U.S. troops, may be sitting on as much as $1 trillion of unmined rare minerals, making it one of the richest mining areas on Earth.

Afghanistan's current "donor economy" status means that post-2014, the local government will sustain itself with the assistance of the other countries and private foreign investors. With the U.S. presence minimized, other investors in Afghanistan's economy will more prominently feature those of other countries currently also invested in the region, such as Iran, Pakistan, China, Japan, the UK, India, Turkey, etc. With this in mind, the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations has released reports that support Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's "New Silk Road" vision for Afghanistan's future. All sides are asking: How Afghanistan can attract new sources of foreign private-sector investment and connect to markets abroad, while generating new resources, markets, and investment opportunities for the entire region?

Fresh in everyone's mind is the fact that this week, senior Afghan government official Nadia Sediqqi, acting head of the women's affairs department in Laghman province was shot dead on her way to work. Clearly, if Afghanistan wants to attract foreign business partners, Afghanistan's government will need to do more to ensure all women are safe and capable of doing business within its borders.

We must ensure Afghan women are educated, qualified, and willing to fill business and leadership positions. Recently, USAID announced millions in funding to promote the role of women in Afghanistan's economy. Rather than disseminate the funds to one or two mega-contractors with little oversight, this money should be given to Afghan programs which operate within the Afghan educational system. Due to recent attacks on Afghan schools targeting female students, security at participating schools will need to be increased. To be successful, families whose mothers and daughters attend job training and education programs should be paid for their participation. Since mothers are the heads of household whose influence is critical to the family's willingness to access education for their daughters, an effort should be made to recruit potential non-traditional age student mothers. "Success" of the program should be measured in terms of high school graduation rates, not the woman's ability to sign a contract for a microloan that she cannot read. The long term success of any microloan initiatives should also be more carefully monitored.

While it did not go unnoticed that the Western corporations at the AACC conference sent mainly men as their representatives, the world still looks at Afghanistan in terms of the fact that 50 percent of the population is made up of female workers who are effectively unwelcome to participate in Afghan government and business matters. One way to elevate the status of women in Afghanistan may be to increase the presence of women in the Afghan media. When we effectively publicly showcase the contributions and accomplishments Afghan women make, we demonstrate their value to society, and hopefully this will result in fewer presidential appointees being shot dead on the job.

Another way to encourage Afghan autonomy is by promoting Afghan workers who speak their mind and show initiative by making independent decisions, says Gregg Willhauck, director of congressional and government relations for the Center for International and Private Enterprise. The fragile and dependent nature of the Afghan economy has meant that some Afghan workers are afraid to make decisions independently or contribute valuable feedback that might offend foreign donors. Only when we do more to protect the lives and jobs of whistleblowers who come forward to report inefficiencies and mismanagement of funds can we avert corruption, such as recent scandals involving USAID and Kabul Bank fraud.

H.E. Noorullah Delawari, governor of Central Bank of Afghanistan also reiterated at the AACC conference the need for the press to report more responsibly on Afghanistan, citing the example of a recent spike in Afghan inflation rates due to inaccurate and inflamatory media reports.

Recently when speaking on the issue of Afghanistan's national security, Afghan President Hamid Karzai upset international sponsors when he expressed his concerns that "part of the [regional] insecurity is coming to us from the structures that NATO and America created in Afghanistan." We agree that when it comes to ensuring the safety and well-being of all people currently situated within Afghan borders, there is a better, safer, more ethical and efficient manner in which U.S. tax dollars can be used.

We share President Karzai's concerns about recent fraud scandals and human rights abuses perpetrated by foreign military security contractors in Afghanistan. It is no secret that it is the nature of a corporation to seek the most profit using the least amount of invested resources. While most foreign businesses in Afghanistan behave responsibly, there are some less ethical security corporations which appear to create deadly messes for the express purpose of getting paid to profitably clean them up. With threats of a "fiscal cliff" looming in Congress, we remain extremely concerned over what, if any impact it may have on security contractor's conduct.

"The best security is indicated by the smallest fences that show all players in the community are invested together in maintaining the land with pride," said James L. Bullion, director for the U.S. Department of Defense Task Force for Business and Stability Operations.

Afghan families and the Taliban are not the only people in Afghanistan. U.S. soldiers, tourists, international business people, refugees also remain in Afghanistan, all of whom have families who love them and worry about the enormous risks and sacrifices they face every day.

Therefore, it is very important to make sure that U.S. dollars are invested in companies that are not just competent, but also transparent and accountable for the services they provide. That the corporate security firms are not only rewarded when they do a good job protecting our families, but that they be held accountable for taking risks that kill our families and undermine the progress we continue to make in Afghanistan with the support of the vast majority of the international community.

Recommendation #5: Remember The People, Families From All Over The World Currently In Afghanistan

While Mr. Naderi is correct in that the mines under Afghani feet pose enormous potential in terms of the wealth and prosperity that their precious minerals may bring to the region, the question remains as to what Afghanistan as a country will have left when they are gone. The mines themselves are not an accomplishment of the Afghan people who are vulnerable to the types of brutal exploitation and atrocities witnessed in other impoverished mining countries in Central Africa. Independent journalist Keith Harmon Snow has created a compelling documentary film and book project about the politics of genocide in a case study on Central Africa. We should take care that Afghanistan should not suffer the same fate.

We look forward to sitting down together with the international community to create new policies that demonstrate more effectively our commitment to accountability for the security and prosperity of the region.]]>Hope, Progress in the New Afghanistan (Part 1)tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.22649462012-12-12T09:59:53-05:002013-02-11T05:12:01-05:00Anne Stevensonhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/anne-stevenson/Afghanistan Today

Afghanistan civilization is rich with culture, spanning back as far back as the Middle Paleolithic era. In 2001, Afghanistan was reborn as a post-Taliban modern society that is learning to fit in an international diplomatic and business community. Afghanistan's current "donor economy" status means that the local government sustains itself with the assistance of the other countries and private foreign investors.

Yesterday's "rebels" are today's newer, younger generation of legitimate political and business leadership who will continue to transform the country from a post-conflict society to an active player in the global economy. For example, during the war, Mr. Abdul Hadi Khalid fought against Taliban, but now runs a successful construction company (Sediq Now Bahar Construction Company) that has become a key player in the redevelopment of Afghanistan.

The progressive face of the new leadership, positive influence, and increased marketability that local media outlets such as TriVision have brought to Afghanistan could be seen in the way that people dressed at the conference. Media and Internet has brightly changed the face of Afghanistan in the past ten years. The Ministry of Communication and IT (MCIT) reports that recently, approximately two million Afghans became connected to the internet, and the World Bank estimates that five million will be connected to the web by 2016. USAID reports that since 2003, the $1.5 billion invested in Afghanistan's telecom industry has resulted in the addition of over 100,000 jobs to the local markets. All of the men at the AACC conference wore suits and ties, which even a year ago may have resulted in death threats for the Afghan businessman who stepped outside of the local traditional dress. Under the Taliban, women did not go to school or hold prominent positions in the business community, yet all of the participants welcomed the participation of the few women present.

Since the Americans arrived in 2001, the Afghan economy has grown from zero to 1000, and this prosperity has immensely improved the quality of life for the people who live in the region. For example, more families than ever now own cars. Investments in small business development at the provincial level have grown local economies, transforming once remote rural villages into prospering urban areas. Electricity and running water now reaches very remote areas previously without these basic services.

Infrastructure improvements to the roads and transportation systems mean that local farmers are able to send their fruits and vegetables into urban markets to make money for their families. This additional income means that some Afghan families are able to send their children to study abroad, and that families who were never expecting such a comfortable life can dream bigger than their parents dared to.

Growing World Investment in Afghanistan

"2014 is not the end. This is a new dawn in Afghanistan" said Keynote Speaker U.S. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood when speaking about U.S. plans to reduce the number of troops in Afghanistan to 10,000 U.S. soldiers by 2014. When introducing Secretary LaHood at the podium, former Pennsylvania Congressman and current AACC President and CEO Dr. Donald Ritter energized the crowd by stating the importance of LaHood's cabinet level interest in Afghanistan's future.

International corporations have begun making large investments in the region. Sadat Mansoor Naderi, chairman of the Afghan Gold and Minerals Company believes that the mining industry is a promising, long-term source of economic growth and stability for the region after 2014. The value of the Aynak copper mine, Sheberghan gas fields and Ghazni lithium mines have been estimated to be as much as $3 trillion. For instance, the Aynak copper field alone has created over 1000 local jobs. Joji Tokeshi, country director for the Afghan Resident Mission, Asian Development Bank also outlined more than $1.9 billion his organization has invested in the country's transportation system, $700 million in developing energy, power, and gas systems, and more than $500 million spent on natural resources development.

In his speech, Secretary LaHood outlined the importance of a thriving transportation system in a global market where goods and services need to move around. Safi Airways is now the country's only UN-approved international airline. Previously, post-9/11 airline industry blacklisting meant there were no airlines approved by the EU to provide flight services in the country. However, the airline industry has grown more than any other business in Afghanistan, successfully connecting the world to its borders.

Affirming this message, President of Supreme Group USA, Army LTG (Ret'd) Robert T. Dail spoke of his company's investment of over $250 million in transportation and logistics infrastructure in Afghanistan; it's spent nearly $650 million in transportation expenditures in the Afghanistan industry over the past decade. "Infrastructure exists today in Afghanistan," said Dail. "The question is what do you want to achieve with it moving forward?"

H.E. Noorullah Delawari, governor of Central Bank of Afghanistan says that strides made in Afghanistan's historically corruption-riddled banking and investment sector. Progress is demonstrated by the fact that since 2001, the country's GDP has tripled, reserve assets have increased by nearly $2 billion, and there are now 17 banks licensed and operating within the country.

However, Delawari says that lack of credit available for Afghan consumers in the Islamic banking system pose significant economic barriers to Afghanistan's economic future. Currently, most of Afghanistan's imported goods are prepaid prior to shipment Delawari says, and 90 to 95 percent of these transactions occur outside the formal banking system. In addition, Afghanistan is a landlocked region that remains dependent primarily upon Iranian and Pakistani corporations to transport imported and exported goods through the foreign ports of Islam Qala (Iran) and Karachi (Pakistan). While SMN Investments' emergence as Afghanistan's first insurance company is promising, these goods must still be shipped by foreign companies to Afghanistan over insecure, poorly maintained roads. Ambassador Thomas Miller said that while a world-class transportation system and infrastructure comparable to that in the U.S. is a long ways off in Afghanistan, USAID and the ABADE program have made strides in making that a reality. "The U.S. will continue to work together with Afghanistan to ensure safe food sources, roads, airports, and buildings become a reality," said Secretary LaHood, demonstrating the U.S.'s continued commitment to economic development in Afghanistan.

Everyone who attended the AACC conference left feeling energized and hopeful about Afghanistan's economic future. In Part 2 of this article, Mustafa and I look forward to sharing with you how we think Afghanistan can attract new sources of foreign private-sector investment and connect to markets abroad, while generating new resources, markets, and investment opportunities for the entire region.

Mustafa and Anne at the AACC conference]]>How to Identify, Train and Inspire Women To Pursue Public Officetag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.21594792012-11-19T12:24:05-05:002013-01-19T05:12:01-05:00Anne Stevensonhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/anne-stevenson/Emerge Massachusetts 5th anniversary training national leaders in advancing women's equality and representation in politics. "You are going to see what it's like to be a fly on the wall in the American women's political locker room there Patty. Wear a suit and tie."

"The road to elected office for women is different because we are perceived differently and held to different standards than men are. When it came to women's issues the 2012 election cycle, we saw lawmakers and media make the biggest displays of misogyny, idiocy, and buffoonery the American public had ever witnessed," said Emerge Advisory Council member and Suffolk County Sheriff Andrea Cabral."The message from voters on November 7th was clear; you can keep us down, but we will vote you out of office."

Cheers erupted from the crowd.

"You can tell Governor Romney that under an Obama Administration, New Hampshire has the nation's has first all female led delegation, not just a binder!" said keynote speaker Krystal Ball, co-host of MSNBC's "The Cycle."

When Ball ran for Congress in 2010, she was appalled at how many advisors, even other members of Congress, instructed her to run a campaign that concealed her identity as a mother and a woman:

"I was told many times to cut my hair, wear conservative clothing, and stop talking about my daughter. Men are never asked to undermine their core family values this way. Emerge's resources are important assets for female candidates who need support to stay true to their authentic self and get their message out to all voters."

WOMEN MAKE PROGRESS, BRIDGE DIFFERENCES IN BIDS FOR LEADERSHIP

Emerge's 2012 Woman of the Year, Barbara Lee, explained that women are grossly under represented in government because women do not perceive the business of politics in the same way that men do, they are held to different standards, and it's harder for them to get their message funded.

"Funding Emerge was a no brainer when I saw how it would be used to increase representation of women in elected office through strategic advice, candidate training, direct support, and voter mobilization efforts."

Lee says the tide is turning:

"A groundbreaking 20 women will hold Senate seats, which means for the first time in America 20 percent of the Senate will be women. At least 77 women won seats in the U.S. House of Representatives--another record achievement. Women increased their ranks in Congress while breaking barriers."

And Lee should know because her Foundation has helped every sitting Democratic woman governor and U.S. Senator get elected since 1998. Emerge MA Executive Director Judy Neufeld (a fellow Tufts Alum) says that Lee's support is one of the key reasons why 20% of Emerge's all female alumni have run for office, and 53% were elected.

THE FUTURE OF THE GOOD OLD BOYS CLUB

Emerge alumni also benefit from strategic advice from political veterans like Sheriff Andrea Cabral. Since 2004, voters have twice reelected Cabral to what is certainly one of the biggest predominantly white and politically inbred boys club in Massachusetts. When asked for her thoughts on whether there is a double standard for women running for office and the challenges posed by sexist candidates like Missouri's favorite "legitimate rape" theorist, Republican Senate candidate Todd Akin, Cabral told me:

"I have zero tolerance for this kind of naked ignorance, especially when it's so expressed with the kind of amiable certainty we saw repeatedly throughout the year. When male candidates aggressively defend themselves or their position on an issue, they are "no-nonsense." When female candidates do that, they are called "scolding" or "intimidating" or the ultimate: "cold." That's because women are usually held responsible for how their personalities make others feel about themselves. Men are usually excused for how their personalities make others feel about themselves."

So I asked Cabral how she managed to keep public message focused on her professional accomplishments and off distractions like race or gender bias, which became a centerpiece in Elizabeth Warren's bid for Senate?

Sheriff Cabral says keeping it positive is the answer:

"My campaign slogans were, "The Professional, not the Politician" and "Integrity Matters." We won by 20 points; 60% to 40%... I think people appreciate a female candidate who stands up to that nonsense (in her own way) and keeps refocusing press and voters on the substance of her message; what she knows, what she can accomplish and how. That also works with donors, although if it's not a high profile race, it can be very difficult to raise money. Inexplicably, women generally give less, and often not at all, to female candidates."

Admittedly, it is a myth not only that all women support each other, but also that women can only be effectively represented by other women. Emerge is about improving the quality of leadership for everyone, not simply opposing men. While men may see politics predominantly as a business and means of controlling resources and commerce, their strength is rarely questioned. Studies show that women on the other hand, are also judged on their public appearance, and must prove they are strong and tough enough to hold office. This means that a female candidate who runs on a platform that is more comprehensive and features more prominently day to day issues affecting families will often be perceived as a "weak." These views must be included in the voting decisions of all elected officials, regardless of gender.

Thanks to organizations like Emerge, some female candidates have the tools they need to demonstrate why doing the right thing can be profitable and are more effective and obtaining funding for their winning campaigns.]]>